A Comparison: Francis of Assisi and St. Seraphim of Sarov

c
c

During my prayer two great lights appeared before me (deux grandes lumibres m'ont
ete montrees)²one in which I recognized the Creator, and another in which I
recognized myself.
²Francis' own words about his prayer
He (Fr Serge) thought about the fact that he was a burning lamp, and the more he felt
that, the more he felt a weakening, a quenching of the divine light of truth burning
within him.
²L.N. Tolstoy, "Father Serge."
The truly righteous always consider themselves unworthy of God.
²Dictum of St Isaac the Syrian
Studying the biographical data of Francis of Assisi, a fact of the utmost

interest concerning the mysticism of this Roman Catholic ascetic is the
appearance of stigmata on his person. Roman Catholics regard such a
striking manifestation as the seal of the Holy Spirit. In Francis' case, these
stigmata took on the form of the marks of Christ's passion on his body.
The stigmatisation of Francis is not an exceptional phenomenon among
ascetics of the Roman Catholic world. Stigmatisation appears to be
characteristic of Roman Catholic mysticism in general, both before it
happened to Francis, as well as after. Peter Damian, as an example, tells of
a monk who bore the representation of the Cross on his body. Caesar of
Geisterbach mentions a novice whose forehead bore the impress of a Cross.
[1] Also, a great deal of data exists, testifying to the fact that after Francis'
death a series of stigmatisations occurred which, subsequently, have been
thoroughly studied by various investigators, particularly in recent times.
These phenomena, as V. Guerier says, illuminate their primary source.
Many of them were subjected to careful observation and recorded in detail,
e.g.,, the case of Veronica Giuliani (1660-1727) who was under doctor's
observation; Luisa Lato (1850-1883) described by Dr Varleman, [2] and
Madelaine N. (1910) described by Janat. [3]
In Francis of Assisi's case, it should be noted that the Roman Catholic
Church reacted to his stigmatisation with the greatest reverence. It
accepted the phenomenon as a great miracle. Two years after his death, the
Pope canonized Francis as a saint. The chief motive for his canonization
was the fact of the miraculous stigmata on his person, which were accepted
as indications of sanctity. This fact is of singular interest to Orthodox
Christians, since nothing similar is encountered in the lives of the Orthodox
Church's Saints²an outstanding exponent of which is the Russian Saint,
Seraphim of Sarov.
It should be mentioned here, that the historical accounts of Francis'
stigmatisation do not now give rise to any doubts in the scholarly world. In
this regard, reference is made to Sabbatier who studied Francis' life, and
especially his stigmatisation, in detail. Sabbatier came to the conclusion
that the stigmata were definitely real. Sabbatier sought to find an
explanation of the stigmatisation in the unexplored area of mental
pathology, somewhere between psychology and physiology. [4]
Before proceeding with an explanation of Francis' stigmatisation from an
Orthodox mystical standpoint²the primary purpose of this paper²an
investigation of stigmata as physiological phenomena will be undertaken at
this point, since such an investigation will contribute valuable information
for a subsequent Orthodox evaluation of the "mysticism" of the Roman
Catholic saint.
Guerier includes in his work on Francis the scientific findings of G. Dumas
who analysed the process of stigmatisation from a psycho-somatic
viewpoint. [5] The following are the conclusions Dumas came to concerning
stigmatics:
1. One must recognize the sincerity of stigmatics and that stigmata appear
spontaneously, i.e., they are not self-inflicted wounds, inflicted while the person is in
an unconscious state.
2. The wounds on stigmatics are regarded as phenomena relating to the circulatory
system (blood vessels) and are explained as effects of mental suggestion which does
affect digestion, circulation of blood, glandular secretions. It can result in cutaneous
injuries.
3. The wounds on stigmatics appear while they are in an ecstatic state which results
when one is absorbed in some sort of contemplated powerful image, and surrenders
control to that image.
4. The stigmata appear not only as a result of one's passive imaging of a wound on
the body, but, according to the testimony of stigmatics, when the imaging is
accompanied by the active action of the image itself ²specifically that of a fiery ray or
lance, seen as proceeding from a contemplated wound, which wounds the stigmatic's
body. Often, this happens gradually, and not with the first vision, until the degree
eventually is reached where the image contemplated during ecstasy finally gains
control over the contemplating subject.
Dumas established the following general criteria for stigmatisation: all
stigmatics experience unbearable pain in the affected parts of the body, no
matter what form the stigmata take²imprint of Cross on the shoulder;
traces of the thorns of a crown of thorns on the head; or, as with Francis of
Assisi, as wounds on the hands, feet and on the side. Together with the
pain, they experience great delight in the thought that they are worthy to
suffer with Jesus, to atone, as He did, for the sins of which they are

inn cent. [ ] ( hi, c ue, i c mmenute ith the mn th lic
ticti n the y,

hich i un n n t the O th d hu ch.) [ ]
um' eneliti n e etemely inteetin ince they imly tht in
the ce timtiti n, t m the imi ned em ti nl t te
(n em ti nl ec ty the het) et le i l lyed by ) mentl
element b) ment l imin eentin cute uein c)ut
ueti n, i.e., eie mentl nd liti nl imule diected t d
tn ltin the uein the imined ime int d) hyicl
eelinin nd, inlly, e) the ducti n n the el m ( und )
uein timt.
um' be ti n ec nie ct m e thn the em ti nl ( hich
Willim me c n ide the uce myticim) [] hich ly n equl,
i n t ete le in the ce tim titi n. hee m y be
ummied

1. n inten e l b ment l im in tin,
. !u
e tin,

3. !enu l eelin , nd,

". #hy il ic l m ni e t tin .
he iniicnce thee ill be ent lte.
F ll in the bie cientiic nly i
c ncenin tim tie in enel, eciic dt,
edin Fnci' ecty nd ii n,
c ntined
in the hich ill i e
the bc und ledin t the ii n, ell
dec iti n the hen men n.
$
he timtiti n Fnci ii, due t
the eult hi ii n, e c ibed t
in ul ye. he ye i n inten e
ledin n hi t tht he my eeience
the uein hit in hi b dy nd ul. %n
the ye, Fnci deie i ine in titi n
the eeience nd thit t eeience thi
n t jut ith hi ul, but
hu,
u endein himel t ecttic ye, he did
n t en unce hi b dy, but in itin

ethly, b dily en ti n , i.e., hy ic l
uein .
Fnci' ye n eed. he ch nicle y tht,
Fnci elt himel
c mletely tn med int hit.
hi tn m ti n n t nly in
spirit, but also in body, i.e., not only in spiritual and psychological
sensations, but also in physical ones. How did the vision actually occur?
First of all, quite unexpectedly for him, Francis saw something described as
miraculous: he saw a six-winged Seraph, similar to the one described by the
Prophet Isaiah, coming down from heaven to him. (First stage of vision).
Then, after the Seraph approached, Francis, thirsting for Jesus and feeling
himself "transformed into Christ," began to see Christ on the Seraph, nailed
to a cross. In the words of the chronicle, "And this Seraph came so close to
the saint that Francis could clearly and distinctly see on the Seraph the
image of the Crucified One." (Second state& of vision). Francis recognized in
the image of the Seraph Christ Himself ho had come down to him. [9] He
felt Christ's suffering on his body,
whereupon his desire to
experience this suffering was
satisfied. (Third stage of vision).
Then the stigmata began to
appear on his body. His striving
and fervent praying appeared to
be answered. (Fourth stage of
vision).
The amazing complexity of
Francis' vision is startling. Over
the initial vision of the Seraph,
who had, apparently, descended
from heaven for Francis, was
superimposed another image²the
one Francis thirsted to have above
all, that of the Crucified Christ.
The developing process of these
visions leaves one with the
impression that the first vision
(that of the Seraph), so
unexpected and sudden, was outside the realm of Francis' imagination, who
longed to see the Crucified Christ, and to experience His sufferings. In this
manner, it can be explained how such a complex conception, in which both
visions, both images²that of the Seraph and of Christ ²found room in
Francis' consciousness.
The experience of Francis of Assisi is remarkable and of singular interest to
Orthodox Christians, since as mentioned above, nothing similar is
encountered in the experience of the Orthodox Church with a long line of
ascetics, and equally long history of mystical experiences. As a matter of
fact, all of the things Francis experienced in the process of his
Vti'm (tiV ti)n e the * ey be'uilementVthehuchF theVe+e tedly
ned inVt!
ec llinh)the VceticVtheOth
huchun eVt n thehiheVt
(Viitu l) ye V et ile inthehil li ,itiVtbeemh Vi,e hee
th ttheye e thiV ye lnVi etheineVn lVti* inV, V
Vyneetice tin(m nce tinith )t
chie* entnlyme* eythin but lV
mthuht.h tiV, tbeVt, iectViitu lele* tinthe
eVnt ,henthe thelyiit
imVelintece eVtheVulic ntith
ninVhichc nntbeuttee .[10]V n
e
mle,tV cyi inhiV6 V yV,
VulhichleV ,in , n inim lne
in Ve ce.FiVtele VeyuVelm llyu
ut tt chmentV,thenyuhe tillbe blet
uniteith uninith iVece e
bymm tte.[11]tiVthel in
Ve intNilVin i,hee,th tVl VheV
thuhith iVtinctcl ityteVent VeiuV
ju
t Vitintthe llee iineiVit tinth t .
F nciVe
eience .nthehe
mniVheVNee eVienVee ny ce
im e uin ye.ntiVhVenVyiVin
nelV,eV,hiVt,leVtyulVeyumin bymiVt inthe
ltheVhehe n VhitheenemieVthe emnV.he
beinninthebeuilement
()themin iV inly,
hichmeVthemin tty
n eeVenttheeityinVme
mim e.[1-]
F nciVecVt tic ye V
nVee ,butintheliht
bthtV cV n tNilV
cunVelV,cle lyntbyhiVt.
hechnicleV yVth tF nciV
elthimVelcmletely
t nVme inthiVt,
t nVme ntnlyinViit,
but lVinb y,i.e.,ntnlyin
Viitu l n Vychlic l
VenV tinV,but lVinhyVic l
neV.While ntinth t
F nciV Vullycnince th t

heh beenViitu llyt enuttheV,theiVeVeci lhyVic l
VenV tinVc nnt, cc inttV c,be Vcibe tthe ctin
Viitu lly e.
F nciVhyVic lVenV tinVc nbee
l ine Vthe hiVnment l
im in tinmin llelthiVViitu lecVt Vy.tiVh tV y,inthiV
ieninVt nce,hich V min ntinF nciV
beuilement×hiVViitu li e,hiV
ment liVm(ment lim in)but,in nyc Ve,the
ment liVm V theVtn.hiViVcnime bythe
VubVt ntiecicumVt nceVtheunuVu llycmle

iVinhich VeVente tF nciV teheelt
himVelcmletelyt nVme inteVuVhichiV
cle ly eyVeeeVt te,h initVtV, V
tNilVV yV,in inly.
hee
e te neVVF nciVe
lt tin,hich V
nte inthe eVcitinhiViVin,iVee le eybl lyhen
cm e iththem jeVticiVinhiVthichte him
e
eience hileVein V e cnne thuV y VVinWee .
[13]
ncnt VttF nciV,te him i ntVee teelhimVel
t nVme inteVuVthuhhiV
yeV n l bV.e ye Vimly
n eely,eentinhiVVinV.
uinthecuVehiV ye, n
V eVulthiVe t Vcetic ctV,
themyVtic le ceein
himhichheneitheelt,n
e li/e .t n inbeethethne
(ly ble)ith buninhe t, V
inthe Vli V i ...the
Vul,h inee itVelm
eeythine
ten l,iVunite ith
ye, n th t ye,li e Vt
l meVuun intheVul Vie
eVin,m eVit lliey,[10]t
e himune
ecte ly VVtunne
iththe e ncethe
MyVteiuViinee.t
e himneitheim ine ,n
e mt,ne
ecte Vuch iVin.
Whenitccue ,he VVVtunne
th titt thuVhimt

cmethiVVenVeV. te,he
himVel eVcibe h th h ene .tiVthe VVtuc by nunuVu l
liht VimtheVun.henheV thenM ninly,Vhinin
bihteth ntheVunith nine bleliht n Vuun e Vby V m
beeVbythehe enlyeV.minuttheNth te(the
V nctu y)hiVtVte beethe mn n ,litinuiVh n V,
bleVVe thVeheeVein n thVehee yin.heiVin
then niVhe .
ee litemVinthe ccuntte himV
iVin einteeVtinthiVVtu y.FiVtly,in
iectcnt Vtt ye,te himV
yeiV ei nyelementth tul
emtelyVueVtth the eVie nyiVible
(VenVy)VinVtheiineeVence.e Vt
ll, i hethin inhiVlieth the Vee
thybeint nVme inteVuV, V
F nciV ye .he eych cteiVticthe
intV yeiV un humility,
ei ence byhiV ticul te cneVVin
VinulneVVhichmte himt
yeuleent nce.heViniic nce
thiV, VthehuchF theVee te lyint
ut,iVth ttuehumilityeectielyeentV 1
2
nem llinint inly.
Vecn un Vectte himV yeiVthe ctth tn
iineM nieVt tiniV V e .
Neithe,cuVe, Vmentine
eiuVly, V nythine
t neuVt
hiVeent nce,thuhtim e hile
he ye .hiV,cuVe,ul be
cmmenVu teithte himV
eent nce,VincehiV ticul tinit
in ic teVquitecle lyth thehimVel
Vnee eceie tthin th theh
chiee leelthineVVhee,in
VitehiVVinV,hecul bl ly V
lythinV.heh thuht but
himVelinthiVm nne,heul h e
e VilyVlie intcnceit.t
e himV ye Vinten e the
e
ctVitehich i in ee m e
himthytheiineViVin.t
M
imVtheneVVinthe
e
eVVe itthuV,e
1
hh Vntyet tt ine t nle e
of God inspired by love, thinks highly of what he does according to God. But
a man who has received it repeats in his heart the words of our forefather
Abraham, when God appeared to him, 'I am earth and ashes' (Gn.18:27)."
Concerning St Seraphim's vision, it should be noted that the highest
spiritual state, attained through the way indicated by the ascetics in
the ^ 3, develops in a person's
heart 4the 54 and 4 spheres, and,
consequently, 4 the sphere of mental imagination. Abba Evagrios in
8
his 647 4 ² says:
The mind will not see the place of God in itself, unless it rises above all thoughts of
material and created things; and it cannot rise above them 9

It will
free itself of passions by means of virtues, and of simple thoughts by means of
spiritual contemplation; but it when there appears to it that
light which, during prayer, marks the pl ace of God. [16]
The experience of man's mystical union with God is, therefore, usually very
difficult to convey in human terms. It happens, however, that visions are
allowed people who have cultivated passionlessness in themselves, but in
the majority of these cases these visions are momentary, and they strike the
inner being of the person²they come as if from within. St Isaac the Syrian
elaborates: "If you are pure, then heaven is within you; and in yourself you
will see angels, and with them and in them, the Lord of Angels." [17] The
Fathers of the Orthodox Church teach that all these experiences are beyond
any expectation of the humble man, for the ascetic in his humility does not
feel himself worthy of this.
Recapitulating St Seraphim's experience, it c an be seen that it bore the
following characteristics:
1. Simplicity;
2. Repentance;
3. Humility;
4. An unexpected vision beyond sensory and rational categories;
5. Spiritual ecstasy or ravishment.
Emphasizing the last item, St Isaac, quoted above, explain s: "...the
contemplation of a hyper-conscious vision, granted by Divine Power, is
received by the soul²within itself immaterialy, suddenly and unexpectedly;
it is discovered and revealed from within, because, in Christ's words, 'the
kingdom of heaven is within you'²This contemplation inside the image,
imprinted in the hidden mind (the higher intellect) reveals itself without
any thought about it." [18]
From the above points taken from a comparison of the two visions and of
what Francis and St Seraphim experienced in these, there is a sharp
difference in the mysticism of the two. St Seraphim's mysticism appears as
a purely spiritual ecstasy, as something bestowed on the ascetic, as a gift of
a spiritual vision, as an enlightenment of his higher intellect, [19] while
Francis' spiritual experience is a mysticism induced by his will, and
obviously darkened by his own imagination and sensuality.
A further distinctive difference between the two is the different relationship
expressed by them toward Christ. In contrast to Saint Seraphim, who
experienced Christ's spiritual power in his heart and accepted Christ within
himself, Francis in his imaging, received his impression primarily from
Christ's earthly life. Francis was absorbed in Christ's external aspect of
suffering. This impression came upon him at Monte La Verna as if from
without.
Concomitant with his very strong desire to experience Christ's suffering,
was his compulsion to imitate other earthly aspects of Jesus' life. He not
only sent his own "Apostles" to various regions of the earth to preach,
giving them virtually the same instructions the Saviour gave to His
Apostles, [20] but he even produced before his disciples not long before his
death something similar to the great Mystical Supper itself. "He recalled,"
says his biographer, "that sanctified meal which the Lord celebrated with
His disciples for the last time." [21] This presumption cannot be excused on
the basis of his flamboyant life, regardless how severe his asceticism was or
how many virtuous things he did. It stands as a prime indication, from an
Orthodox point of view, of the severity of his fall into the condition of
spiritual beguilement.
Before proceeding it is imperative to outline briefly the condition
called . In general terms, according to Metropolitan Antony
Khrapovitsky, ( ,in Russian) usually results when the devil
deludes the person by suggesting the that he has been granted
visions (or other gifts of Grace). Then the evil one constan tly blinds his
conscience, convincing him of his apparent sanctity and promises him the
power of working wondrous acts. The evil one leads such an ascetic to the
summit of a mountain or the roof of a church, and shows him a fiery
chariot, or some other such wondrous thing, which will bear him to
Heaven. The deluded one then steps into it (that is, he accepts the delusion)
and falls headlong into the abyss, and is dashed to death without
repentance. [22]
:
hat is clear from such a brief analysis of is that the subject who
undergoes the experience usually has succumbed to some form of pride,
usually vainglory, hence the presumption that one has finally achieved a
state from whence he is deluded to think that he no longer must be watchful
concerning the possibility of a fall into sin, or even blasphemy against God.
It is, of course, the Luciferian sin, and by definition the most difficult to
contend with, hence, the importance and constant emphasis in religious
writing, concerning ascetic obedience and humility until the very end of
one's earthly life.
It has already been shown
; above that Francis' vision contains strong marks
of spiritual deception. hat remains, therefore, is a characterization of
Francis' work and acts which will stand as the prime characterization of his
mysticism. Presenting a few incidents from Francis' life, and then,
contrasting these with incidents from the life of St Seraphim of Sarov, it will
be possible to draw a final conclusion regarding the mysticism of these two
ascetics. It should be stated here that the example incidents chosen are
generally characteristic of the subjects.
It is recorded in the that Francis at one time failed to fulfil the rules
of a strict fast because of an illness. This oppressed the ascetic's conscience
to such a degree that he decided to repent and punish himself. The
chronicle states:
... he commanded that the people be gathered on the street in Assisi for a sermon.
<
hen he had finished the sermon, he told the people that no one should leave until
he returned; he himself went into the cathedral with many brethren and with Peter
de Catani and told Peter to do what he would tell him to do according to his vow of
obedience and without objecting. The latter answered that he could not and should
not desire or do anything against his [Francis'] will either to him or to himself.
^

Francis commanded another brother to fill a cup with ashes and, having
climbed up onto the eminence from which he had preached, to pour these ashes on
his head. This one, however, did not obey him, since he was so distressed by this
order because of his compassion and devotion to Francis. But Brother Peter took the
rope in his hands and began dragging Francis behind him as the latter had
commanded. He himself cried bitterly < during this, and the other brothers were
bathed in tears from pity and grief. hen Francis had thus been led half-naked
before the people to the place from which he had preached, he said, 'You and all who
have left the world after my example and follow the way of life of the brethren
consider me a holy man, but before the Lord and you I r epent because during this
sickness of mine I ate meat and meat drippings'.[23]
Of course Francis' sin was not so great and hardly deserved the dramatic
form of penance in which Francis clothed his repentance, but such was a
general characteristic of Francis' piety. He strove to idealize everything
which an ascetic was obliged to do; he strove also to idealize the very ascetic
act of repentance.
Francis' idealization of Christian acts of asceticism can also be noted in his
relationship to the act of almsgiving. This can be seen in the way Francis
reacted to beggars. In Francis' eyes beggars were creatures of a very high
stature in comparison to other people. In the view of this Roman Catholic
mystic, a beggar was the bearer of a sacred mission, being an imag e of the
poor, wandering Christ. Therefore, in his instructions Francis obliges his
disciples to beg for alms. [24]
Finally, Francis' idealized enthusiasm was especially revealed in his
recollections of Christ's earthly suffering. In the biography of Francis it says
that, "being drunk with love and compassion for Christ, blessed Francis
once picked up a piece of wood off the ground and, taking it in his left hand,
he rubbed his right hand over it as if it were a bow over a violin, while
humming a French song about the Lord Jesus Christ. This singing ended
with tears of pity over Christ's suffering, and with earnest sighs, Francis,
falling into a trance, gazed at the sky...." [25]
There can be no doubt, as even Francis' biographers euphemistically attest,
that this important founder of the Franciscan Order was demonstrative in
his acts of repentance, revealing quite graphically the absence of a critical
degree of watchfulness necessary in the ascetic life for the acquisition of
true humility. As a matter of fact, whenever indications of Francis' humility
are expounded upon in the they are never lacking in a
compromising presumptuousness whether God allegedly speaks to him, as
an example, through the mouth of Brother Leon, [26] or when he presumes
that he has been chosen by God "to see good and evil everywhere," when
tested by Brother Masseo for his humility. [27] It is true that Francis
describes his vileness and wretchedness, but there is lacking in all this any
attendant remorse, or contrition that would indicate that he considered
himself unworthy before God. Although he frequently spoke of the necessity
of humility, and gave the Franciscan brethren useful instruction in this
regard, he himself throughout his life experienced this only in isolated fit s,
albeit very strong ones; it came in fits not entirely free, as indicated above,
from exaggeration and melodrama. Nothing can be so revealing in this
matter, however, as his own statements to the brethren. At one time he was
to say to his disciples, "I do not recognize any transgression in myself for
which I could not atone by confession and penance. For the Lord in His
mercy has bestowed on me the gift of learning clearly in prayer in what I
have pleased or displeased Him." [28] These words, of course, are far from
genuine humility. They suggest, rather, the speech of that virtuous man
who was satisfied with himself (the Pharisee) who, in the parable, stood in
the temple, while the Publican prostrated himself in a corner, begging God
in words of true humility: "God be merciful to me a sinner."
=
hen Francis' acts of "humility" are compared with St Seraphim's
thousand day struggle on the rock, a stark contrast results. There, while in
battle with his passions, [29] St Seraphim cried out the very words of the
Publican over and over again: "0 God be merciful to me a sinner." In this
feat there is neither exaltation, nor ostentatious display. Saint Seraphim is
simply having recourse to the only possible means open to him for
forgiveness after, !
!
!
!

Even during his last years, when Saint Seraphim experienced many
perceptions of extra-ordinary spiritual strength, as well as direct
communion with God, he never succumbed to self-satisfaction, or self-
adulation. This is quite apparent in his now famous conversation with N.
Motovilov,[30] as well as during his talk with the monk John when he
manifested, through the Grace of God, an unusual luminosity. Indeed, Saint
Seraphim was unable to express the state of the latter luminosity in his own
words. Also, it is well known that Saint Seraphim was the bearer of an
extraordinary gift of clairvoyance as well as of prophetic vision. The hearts
of people who came to him were an open book to him, yet not once does he
compromise the extraordinary gifts he has received with any display of self-
importance or conceit. His statements and acts (in contrast -to those of
Francis of Assisi- Francis' consciousness was that he had atoned for his sins
and was pleasing to God) are in consonance with what the ascetics detail in
the ^ about the humble man. In the words of St Isaac the Syrian:
The truly righteous always think within themselves that they are unworthy of God.
And that they are truly righteous is recognized from the fact that they acknowledge
themselves to be wretched and unworthy of God's concern and confess this secretly
and openly and are brought to this by the Holy Spirit so that they will not remain
without the solicitude and labour which is appropriate for them while they are in this
life. [31]
Francis' emotional impulses toward humility, similar to the above
mentioned incident in the square of Assisi, were in general rare
manifestations. Usually his humility appeared not as a feeling, but as a
rational recognition of his weak powers in comparison to the Divine Power
of Christ. This was clearly stated in his vision on Monte La Verna when,
"two great lights," as it says in the chronicle, "appeared before Francis: one
in which he recognized the Creator, and the other in which > he recognized
himself. And> at that moment, seeing this, he prayed: Lord! hat am I
before You? hat meaning have I, an insignificant worm of the earth, Your
insignificant servant, in comparison to Your strength?" By his own
acknowledgement, Francis, at that moment, was submerged in
contemplation in which he saw the endless depth of the Divine Mercy and
the abyss of his own nothingness.
Needless to point out, it is the first declaration of the "two great lights," that
manifestly bares the cognitive character of his subsequent query addressed
to God which, in essence, is a very daring process of comparison. There
appears, therefore, a severe contradiction in the passage that cannot be
cm e in nyVenVettheluci Vcitu l tiVtic ccuntV
e inhumility.
te himVhumility, Vnte , VntVmuch tin lcnVciuVneVV
hiVVinV,but cnVt nt eelyeltemtin.nhiVte chinV,bth l
n itten,nhee eVitV yth thecm e himVelttheiinity,
incncluVinVmthiVe inhiVViitu lVt tuV.ecnVt ntly
ehimVelunlyt Vinleemtin limulVetheeelinhiVn
unthineVV(imeectin)hich
eVulte inhe teltcntitin.
heh ntheecluVe, uVVi n
VcetictheOth
huch,
e
eVVe theVenVethiVthuVhe
ccetVnlythem nh
cheVimith eelin
VinulneVV.heee,heejectV
nyneh cheVimith
eelinihteuVneVV.[3 ?]
, V eVultthe be,neeet
cncluVin butF nciV
humilityntheb ViVthe Vcetic
eVcitinVmn @ VticVe in
humilityinthe thenthe
tinmyVtic eVnt e Vthe
i e lhiVti nhumility.
VubVt nti l VehiVn

ihteuVneVV V e thiV
cnVciuVneVVth the Vle Vint
.methinVimil ,m nOth
n lyViVF nciVmyVticiVm,
m ybe lie melVtyVVty "Ae[the Vcetic
ee]thuht,V yVlVty, buthhe V buninl m, n the
meheeltthiV,themeheelt e enin, quenchintheViitu l
lihttuthbunininhim.[33]
ec llintNilV nin,mentine bee,thiVV e lu tinthe
Viitu leVultVF nciV VceticiVmiVcll y,mettheint,iV
n ntece entl nittheVeeebeuilementheun eentnMnte
Ven ,heehe nnunce th theh becme e tlumin y.
huV,F nciVcnVciuVneVVth the lV V liht,th theh theit
t nhtbele Vint ,meetViththe ununcement
the thethe Vceticlie,ntnythee t,hVt teVth titheeiVnt
e
temehumilityin eVn,humilitythehlehe t,Vul n b y,
thenheillntinheitthein m .[3B]tntnyV im tin
ecniCeVth tnly eehumilityc ntuttheeilment le
leading to self-affirmation and self-satisfaction. Only such humility
entering into the very flesh and blood of the ascetic can, according to the
sense of the teaching of the Orthodox Christian ascetics, save him from the
obsessive associations of prideful human thought.
Humility is the essential power which can restrain the lower mind with its
mental passions, [35] creating in a man's soul the soil for the unhindered
development of the higher mind, [36] and from there, through the Grace of
God, to the highest level of the ascetic life²knowledge of God.
"The man wise in humility," says St Isaac the Syrian, "is the source of the
mysteries of the new age." [37]

The chief cause which obfuscated the path of Francis' ascetic life may be
attributed to the fundamental condition of the Roman Catholic Church in
which Francis was nurtured and trained. In the conditions of that time and
in the conditions of the Roman Church itself, true humility could not be
formed in the consciousness of the people. The "Vicar of Christ on earth"
himself with his pretensions not only to spiritual, but also to temporal
authority, was a representative of spiritual pride. Spiritual pride greater
than the conviction of one's own infallibility cannot be imagined. [38] This
basic flaw could not but affect Francis' spirituality, as well as the spirituality
of Roman Catholics in general. Like the Pope, therefore, Francis suffered
from spiritual pride. This is very evident in his farewell address to the
Franciscans when he said: "Now God is calling me, and I forgive all my
brethren, both those present and those absent, their offenses and their
errors and remit their sins as far as it is in my power." [39]
These words reveal that on his death bed, Francis felt himself to be
powerful enough to remit sins like the Pope. It is known that the remission
of sins outside the Sacrament of Penance and the Eucharist in the Roman
Church was a prerogative of papal power. [40] Francis' assumption of this
prerogative could only have been with the assurance of his own sanctity.
In contrast, the ascetics of Holy Orthodoxy never allowed themselves to
appropriate the right of remitting sins. They all died in the consciousness of
their own imperfection and with the hope that God in His Mercy would
forgive them of their sins. It suffices to recall the words of the great fifth
century Thebaid ascetic Saint Sisoe in support of this. Surrounded at the
moment of his impending repose, by his brethren, he appeared to be
conversing with unseen persons, as the chronicle relates, and the brethren
asked: "Father, tell us with whom you are carrying on a conversation?" St
Sisoe answered, "They are angels who have come to take me, butD I am
praying them to leave me for a short time so that I may repent." hen the
brethren, knowing that Sisoe was perfect in virtue, responded, "You have
nnee eent nce, the,the int nVee ,uly nt ni
h eeenbeunteent.[ E1]
Fin lly, Vei ence intheece in hV,themyVticiVmF nciV
VViViee lVth tthiVhihlye e un etheF nciVc nO e
me eVVielyinhiVliein incn itinmthe
timehehe thecmm n t
enethem n thlichuch,
thuhthee
t in yiVin
theuciie hiVtnMnte
Ven n untilthetimehiV e th.
VVt tlin Vitm y e t
Vme,hebem nych cteiVticV
hich ettyic lntichiVt,
hill lVbeVeen Vch Vte,
ituuV,hihlym l,ullle
n cm VVin, n hillbe
e e Vhly(een V eity)by
elehh e lle c n l
m nticiVmtel cethe ce
itinthelyhuch.
heV ctiVth tthe tt inment
F tueViitu lel tinVhiith
'Whe GH IJ HJ IHht K t hiVt Vnee VVibility
heae ' JFays a Gter hs e F nciV,beinutVi ethe
'GL the ather see hM huchhiVt,it VimVVible
as r a MMe t Lt t as th thecul h eeceie iine
V ! t hM t e
N the ce, nytheitVthely
Kre ere Ie t "s y atre iit.iVitVeem nthe
r t "s s y race²Fra cs.' Viit.
M
What ca e re rht r
Madder tha ths asphemy
hat ca e sadder
N tha ths

des #!$ t ats O
%ra cha & h.
''!

PQ
1. Guerier, V., , pp 312-313.
2. Seventeen year old Luisa Lato, usually enjoying complete good health, fell into a condition of ecstasy
every Friday; blood flowed from her left side, and on her hands and feet were wounds exactly
corresponding to the position of the wounds on the body of the crucified Saviour, in the form of the wounds
depicted on crucifixes.
3. Guerier, pp 314-315.
4. #., p 308.
5. Dumas, G., "La Stigmatisation chez les mystiques cretiens," $ R , 1 May 1907; in
Guerier, pp 315-317.
6. Guerier, p 315.
7. According to the Orthodox, the Cross was not a imposed on God, nor was the of the Only-
begotten Son a source of satisfaction to God the Father, as the Latin Scholastics teach. The matter of
"satisfying the Divine Justice of God" is a phrase nowhere to be found in the Scriptures, nor in the writings
S which was developed by
of the Church Fathers, but was a fabrication of Anselm of Canterbury (ca 1100)
Thomas Aquinas to become the official soteriological doctrine in the Latin est. (compare this with
Athanasius the Great, # ).
8. It will be evident from the comparison in this paper that "mysticism'' in the Orthodox Church is beyond
all sensory as well as all rational categories. The normative for this in the ascetic life is dispassion, or
detachment from all needs, feelings and even, ultimately, thoughts, positive or negative (compare, Abba
Evagrios to Anatolios, cited above, p 9).
9. See the life of St Isaaky the Recluse of the Kiev-Caves, % . Synaxis Press, Chilliwack, B.C.,
Canada, 1976, p 21.
10. & , p 292-293, 2nd ed.

11. Kadloubovsky, E. and Palmer, G., ' ^ , "St Isaac of Syria, Directions on
Spiritual Training," Faber and Faber, London, 1959. (hereafter referred to as ' ).
12. ' , p 140, paragraphs 114, 115, 116.
T
13. , pp 61-62 (Rus. ed.), cited in the notes translated from the Russian, see above.
14. ^ , Vol 3, p 322, para 103 (Greek ed.).

15. ' ,p 297, 47.
16. , p 105, para 71.
17. # , 3rd ed., Sermon 8, p 37.
18. ^ , Vol 2, p 467, para 49. Here we must note that the quoted dictum of St Isaac the Syrian²that
a spiritual vision is unexpected²should not be understood as an absolute law for all instances of such
visions. By way of an exception to the cited dictum, but as completely exceptional phenomena, certain holy
ascetics have had such unusual visions which were anticipated by them; but they had a presentiment as an
unconscious prophecy, as a prophecy about what unavoidably must happen. Such an exceptional instance,
as it were, a prophecy of a miracle which was going to happen, occurred with St Serge of Radonezh at the
end of his life. This instance is described in detail in the Russian work, & , p 377. (The
bibliography was not available to the author. It was cited in the notes translated from the Russian, see
above.)
19. See footnote 13, Ch 1, pp 13-22.
20. "Go by two's to various regions of the earth, preaching peace to people and repentance for the remission
of sins." Guerier, p 27 (cf Mk.6:7-12.)
21. Guerier, p 115.
22. Khrapovitsky, Antony, $ . Holy Trinity
Monastery Press, Jordanville, N.Y., 1975.
23. Guerier, p 127 (our emphasis).
24. , p 129.
25. , pp 103-104.
26. Brown, Raphael, . Image Books, Garden City, N.Y., 1958, p 60.
27. # , p 63.

28. Guerier, p 124.
29. The word passions, as used here, denotes all the contranatural impulses of man (pride, vanity, envy,
hatred, greed, jealousy, etc.) that resulted after the disobedience and fall of the forefathers.
30. Motovilov, N.A., . St Nectarios Press, Seattle, 1973 (reprint).
31. # , 3rd ed., Sermon 36, p 155.
32. , 2nd part, Letter 261, p 103.
33. ^ , Vol 2, p 30.
34. ^ , Vol 1, p 33.
35. & , On Mental Passions, 2nd ed., pp 65-74.

36. See above, On the Lower and Higher Minds, pp 6-23.
37. # , p 37.
38. Compare Dostoevsky, #( in
39. Sabbatier, p 352.
40. In the 15th century, Luther protested against this prerogative as expressed in the practice of granting
indulgences.
41. , Book 11, pp 119-120.
Originally printed in , Vol. 2, pp. 39-56.
Authored by the now-reposed George Macris, who was a Priest in the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in
Portland, Oregon at the time of this writing. is published by the New-Ostrog Monastery in Canada.
+++

A Comparison: Francis of Assisi and St. Seraphim of Sarov

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Comparison: Francis of Assisi and St. Seraphim of Sarov

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

c

²Francis' own words about his prayer

²L.N. Tolstoy, "Father Serge."

The truly righteous always consider themselves unworthy of God.

²Dictum of St Isaac the Syrian

Studying the biographical data of Francis of Assisi, a fact of the utmost

ticti n the y,

10. & , p 292-293, 2nd ed.

14. ^ , Vol 3, p 322, para 103 (Greek ed.).

27. # , p 63.

35. & , On Mental Passions, 2nd ed., pp 65-74.

You might also like

A Comparison: Francis of Assisi and St. Seraphim of Sarov

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Comparison: Francis of Assisi and St. Seraphim of Sarov

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

c 

²Francis' own words about his prayer

²L.N. Tolstoy, "Father Serge."

The truly righteous always consider themselves unworthy of God.

²Dictum of St Isaac the Syrian

Studying the biographical data of Francis of Assisi, a fact of the utmost

ticti n the y,

10. &    , p 292-293, 2nd ed.

14. ^ , Vol 3, p 322, para 103 (Greek ed.).

27. # , p 63.

35. &    , On Mental Passions, 2nd ed., pp 65-74.

You might also like

c

ticti n the y,

10. & , p 292-293, 2nd ed.

14. ^ , Vol 3, p 322, para 103 (Greek ed.).

27. # , p 63.

35. & , On Mental Passions, 2nd ed., pp 65-74.